I'm sorry, but Trump rallies NEED to be disrupted - he is a fascist

[jpak]

and he and his supporters NEED to be reminded that fascism is not cool and the majority of Americans of both parties thinks he sucks.

yup

[underpants]

1. I agree

Fully within the protestors' rights

[IsItJustMe]

2. The Germans did not stop Hitler, lets see what Americans will do.

And don't be sorry. You are just showing us the pink elephant that is in the middle of our living room.

[HughBeaumont]

3. Some of his supporters will wear a shirt with Che on it that says "Commies aren't Cool".

Yeah, well, neither are hyper-corporatists, dumbasses.

Glad these assholes can throw their mother's, daughter's, children's and fellow worker's rights and futures in the shitter so nonchalant.

[jpak]

4. The Only Thing Necessary for the Triumph of Evil is that Good Men Do Nothing

yup

[jwirr]

64. I was going to quote that. So I now will just +1. Thank you.

[Svafa]

5. I've been suprised by so many here at DU

condemning the protests. Normally I'm not in favor of protesting campaign rallies, which are basically just pep rallies to get supporters excited about a candidate; however, this man should not be allowed to spread his hate and bigotry. I am glad he's challenged by protesters, and I have never been more proud to be from the Midwest.

[jpak]

6. Yeah - that bothered me too.

Trump is worse than George Wallace, Joe McCarthy and Barry Goldwater combined (all the villains from my life experience).

and his toadies are more vile than he is...

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

58. There seems to be a disagreement on whether it's productive or counterproductive.

Alongside the usual smaller number of people who completely misunderstand how the first amendment works, and thinks 'free speech' is 'protected' from other regular citizens exercising THEIR 'free speech'.

Echoes of the Sanders' rally interruptions early on - many though BLM protesting at his appearances was counterproductive, given that he was the most likely candidate to actually agree with them.

In the Trump version, of course, he certainly won't be 'agreeing with' the protesters in any way, but rather the notion that such protests might be counterproductive is put forth by the folks who feel protesters are actually providing him with the 'villains' in the storyline he feeds his followers.

[Straw Man]

73. I would suggest that it's counterproductive.

I don't think it's a rights issue. The protesters have a right to enter the rally, and the Trumpists have a right to eject them if they become disruptive. Defining "disruptive" might be a little tricky, though.

My fear is just what you say: that it provides him with ready scapegoats to target in his "take back our country" rhetoric. I think it actually helps attendance at his rallies by providing some red-meat entertainment for the faithful. Some of them are hoping for the chance to punch out a protester. If Donald comes through on his promises, they will have the best legal representation money can buy to defend them when they're charged with assault.

[Renew Deal]

7. Are you comfortable with right wingers disrupting Democratic rallies?

Last edited Mon Mar 14, 2016, 05:16 PM - Edit history (1)

Based on the same reasoning in right wingers minds?

[OneGrassRoot]

8. Actually, yes, I am.

I would hope our candidates (and supporters) would model a very different way of engaging.

It wouldn't be perfect, but I have a feeling it would always be better than what we've been seeing at Trump rallies.

[Renew Deal]

10. You're only thinking about one side of it.

You're thinking about the disruption, but not the effect of the disruption.

[OneGrassRoot]

13. No, I actually did think of that...

and I specifically had the Seattle Bernie Sanders-BlackLivesMatter protest in mind.

I can envision Dem candidates giving the protesters x amount of time to say what they want to say, and then making it clear that, in order to get on with the candidates' message, they will need to be peacefully removed if they continue to disrupt. (I'm not saying the Seattle event played out that way...I'm saying that Bernie conceded the stage, something Trump hammers him over. I'm also not suggesting protesters are allowed to go onstage. I don't want to get bogged down in this analogy...lol)

That is a VASTLY different experience than what we're seeing at Trump rallies.

Remember that the protesters at Trump rallies started off being silent. Literally, silent. They would simply stand when he said something offensive. Then it progressed. I think the young man getting sucker punched last week in NC was the last straw. People realized that even when not being violent, they were going to be met with violence at Trump rallies.

And that is not an acceptable thing to allow in a democracy.

[jpak]

12. Let them - it could change their minds and attitudes

yup

[backscatter712]

17. Hey, at least we aren't punching them as security shows them the door.

[Renew Deal]

18. Yet

[jpak]

23. Won't happen

nope

[backscatter712]

25. Bernie or Hillary will not tolerate that.

They're better than Drumpf.

[Skittles]

50. they are protesting PROGRESSIVE POLITICS

people protesting Trump are against RACISM AND FASCISM

*HARDLY* the same

[Renew Deal]

71. You're thinking about it as a logical and reasonable person

But to them, we are all vile. So to them it is the same.

[Skittles]

86. just because their thinking is warped

does NOT mean it equates

thinking is warped on ONE SIDE

[Matrosov]

69. Apples and.. cucumbers

Which Democratic candidate is racist? Sexist? Homophobic? Islamophobic? Attacks the sick? Attacks the poor?

None of them.

Right-wingers reason progressives are trying to destroy America exactly by giving equal value to all people, regardless of their race, gender, orientation, religion, health status, or financial status.

So no, disrupting a Trump rally and disrupting a Democratic rally aren't anywhere near the same thing.

[Renew Deal]

70. You miss the point

All Democrats are considered similarly vile to RWers. So we see them as racist, sexist, etc. They see us communists and amnesty supporters. So they aren't the same thing to you, but they are to them.

[world wide wally]

9. I wonder if any of his supporters realize that this is what our fathers and grandfathers fought

AGAINST in WWII

[CTyankee]

21. and the Vietnam War...remember "Hey, hey, LBJ. How many kids did you kill today?"

Today that war is considered one of the worst disasters we have had in this country...

[world wide wally]

22. But God knows why we were even in Vietnam. We all know why we fought Hitler and Tojo

[CTyankee]

24. we didn't know it but the world had moved on from western imperialism in Asia.

we were basically on the wrong side of history. The French "got it" and slunk out from its miserable defeat. But don't get me started...

[hfojvt]

11. Isn't that a tactic of fascists?

I mean, if a group of people were constantly disrupting Hillary or Bernie rallies, wouldn't we think they were a mob of brownshirts using violence and threats of violence to silence their opponents?

Gotta love politics in this country - we always call the other party fascists and they always call us socialists.

And here some of us are, trying to prove them right.

Disruptions by an obnoxious minority are not likely to win elections.

Hint - if you are losing the support of people who would otherwise be your allies, it is probably time to change your tactics.

[jpak]

14. Nice try - but Hillary and Bernie dealt with disruptors in a very different way than Tump

and potential Trump disruptors would be as smart as the Bundy Bunch - and suffer the same Epic Fail.

yup

[Angel Martin]

31. I don't like these sort of protests

no matter who does them

Standing outside an event with a big sign saying why you don't like Trump is one thing.

But mob disruption which requires events to be cancelled, or protestors rushing the podium, or people yelling and disrupting continually during a speech is something else.

If right wing goons were doing this at Clinton or Sanders events, everyone on this board would be screaming bloody murder.

I think elections should be decided by voters, not by mob intimidation and not by assassins.

[jpak]

33. Yes, it's punk ass little thuggery stuff

n/t

[Abq_Sarah]

67. Yep

I was thinking the same thing.

Like it or not, they get to pick their nominee. Our role is to defeat him during the general election.

[Matrosov]

72. It's about standing up to hate

Fascists wants to suppress and silence the opposition. Is anyone advocating silencing Trump just because he's currently the main opposition for the Democrats? Not at all.

Instead, people want to disrupt his rallies because he's the embodiment of hate. He's racist, sexist, homophobic, Islamophobic, and basically hates anyone who isn't just like him.

If there were a Democratic candidate spouting the same vile drivel as Trump, I'd also be fine with other Democrats disrupting his or her rallies.

[MowCowWhoHow III]

15. It would only escalate

[jpak]

16. Feel the Bern MoFo

[phantom power]

19. I like Charles Pierce's suggestion: protest, but do it *outside* the rallies.

Stay out of the buildings.

Stop being played for such suckers. Stop enlisting yourself in his bloody vaudeville. Stop giving him stuff to lie about at all the rallies that actually do end up happening. Stop making yourselves part of the show, because it's not working. It doesn't affect him at all. In fact, his campaign gains strength from it, like some science-fiction monster that absorbs the energy of whatever attacks it and then uses it to destroy.

...

My suggestion? Create a wave of non-violent protest outside the arenas. Close the streets. Fill the jails, if you must. Force the media coverage, which shouldn't be all that hard at this point. But stay out of the buildings because you can do no good in there. It gives aid and comfort to the forces you are trying to defeat, and it gives a timorous elite political press an excuse to look the other way, and it gives the other candidates from a party that long ago descended into madness one more hallucination to justify why it's eating bugs in public.

Stay out of the buildings. Decline to audition for a part in the freak show. Silent witness can be the most powerful kind there is.

http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a42984/message-to-trump-protesters/

[jpak]

20. Been there - done that

didn't work and I suffered the same abuse from the Fuzz and Bush supporters that I would have inside.

But inside - I would have broken the trance of the Koolaid Drinkers....

[warrprayer]

26. Protestors in Kansas City were on the street outside

And were attacked by police horses and drenched with pepper spray foggers

http://usuncut.com/politics/trump-rally-pepper-spray/

[arcane1]

27. It's also a good way to get them to inevitably start turning on each other n/t

[liberalfromaustin21]

28. I'm with you on that

Trump is a menace, and will destroy our country.

[jpak]

29. He would have had Woody Guthrie in shackles - or worse...

?imgmax=800

[flamingdem]

30. Trump is railing against real Americans of every color, race, belief

Someone has to stand up to him so borderline voters realize - Houston: there's a PROBLEM!

[Earth_First]

32. Agreed.

Ordinarily I would not support disrupting a campaign rally.

However, this is rapidly escalating from organized political activity, and into an organized hate group.

They're organizing a militia for cripes sake!

Fascism deserves to be kicked square in the ass every.damn.time.

[First Speaker]

34. What happens if Trump wins the GOP nomination...?

...I'm not trying to make a point or be sarcastic; I'm genuinely puzzled as to what happens then, if you're trying to shut his rallies down. I think I agree with you--Trump is outside the bounds of reasonable political discourse. But if he's actually on a major party ballot? How will anyone "disrupt" his campaign then, without blood in the streets and blood at the polls? And wouldn't it just inspire a pro-Trump backlash that might, God help us all, actually put him in the White House?

[jpak]

37. I think you have it backwards - Trump's rhetoric caused the current backlash

letting him - and his supporters - get away with this is wrong.

People need to stand up to this.

yup

[tahoocp]

41. Trumps rhetoric caused some but not all

Trump rhetoric directly provoked an old jerk to sucker punch someone, for sure.

Trump rhetoric spurred people to protest and baited them to a fight, sure.

But trump's rhetoric did not cause protestors to take over the stage from Sanders or to grab Trump's leg. Trump didn't make people shut down his rally with tactics/threats. Brown/red-shirt tactics one one side will just encourage brown/red-shirt tactics on the other. Response to an immediate physical threat is different than brown/red-shirt tactics, and I'm disgusted when I hear excuses on whatever side for the tactics.

Where will the hope be for civil interaction and resolution of problems among people who disagree, if this stuff continues?

[uppityperson]

43. Welcome to DU, I am wondering who you are supporting for President?

[tahoocp]

44. It's who I'm not supporting

I'm not very 'pro' anyone

[Dont call me Shirley]

35. The gop needs to be sorry they grew this shit!

[MadDAsHell]

38. To be honest, I think WE grew this shit.

Trump is a direct response to the political correctness movement, just like Sanders is a direct response to Wall Street greed.

We have no one to blame but ourselves for Trump's viable candidacy.

[Dont call me Shirley]

60. Political correctness is an attempt to retain Civility in an era of increasing savagery. The rich

created DT from the savagery they created, just like they created Wall Street.

[DCBob]

36. Totally agree.

His comments are outrageous and un-American and should be shouted down.

[MadDAsHell]

39. The responses to this thread are chilling.

It's amazing how quickly Americans will throw away their rights for a little political capital.

[jpak]

40. People need to step up and confront Trump

Not violently - and they haven't - but they need to do this.

yup

[tahoocp]

42. What response do people WANT at a protest?

Taking over a stage is violent, and BLM activists have done that to Democrats. Grabbing a candidate's leg -- you know if you touch someone when there is a dispute things escalate, people can get charged for assault. Have Trump supporters gone into Sanders or Clinton rallies yet and done that? No. Do you WANT them to respond in kind? Trump is bad enough already, why egg him and his supporters on?

[Ex Lurker]

46. Leftist totalitarians are ust as eager to shut down the opposition as are rightist totalitarians

Some of them are on DU. Some of them are in this thread.

[DemocraticSocialist8]

45. This is what people are failing to understand - His rallies SHOULD be interreupted

Unless we're going to just accept people voting fascism into power. Fascism doesn't become more acceptable if it's democratically-voted in. Fascism is fascism and is completely antithetical to freedom and democracy.

[Democat]

47. Right wingers say the exact same thing about Democratic candidates

Just change the word "Trump" to "Obama" and repost this on a right wing website and everyone will agree with you.

[LAGC]

48. NO!! We must confine our protests to carefully restricted FIRST AMENDMENT ZONES!!

Outside and far away and safe from anyone noticing or caring.

I mean, what if people had actually regularly disrupted Hitler or Mussolini's rallies and stopped their rise to power??

Oh, the horror!!

[Skittles]

49. I APPROVE OF THIS MESSAGE

[Macattack1]

51. some of you are worse than right wingers

good god..some people around here are down right scary... shut down free speech because you disagree? why don't you go all the way and form hit squads...this still is America right? If we really believe our ideas are better than theirs...then we shouldn't have to use violent tactics to "eliminate" the other side's voice..we should have the courage of our convictions to bet on our ideas being more popular..and if our ideas AREN'T more popular..then that's called democracy.

[LAGC]

52. Welcome to DU.

Thanks for your concern.

[Macattack1]

53. thanks for the welcome..but been here since 2012

I like reading more than posting,..and I'm not "concerned"..just voicing my opinion.

[LAGC]

54. Fair enough. And I agree with you. We need to limit these pesky protests to "First Amendment zones."

Outside, and preferably FAR, FAR away from any of Trump's rallies, like way down the street, so that they don't offend any of the delicate fascist-sympathizers attending. Because that would be the polite and proper thing to do.

Dubya Bush was a big believer in "First Amendment zones" too, as you should know.

I mean, it would be a real shame if any more of Trump's rallies had to be cancelled because of these rude People of Color showing up and protesting Trump's racist dog-whistle rhetoric.

A real shame indeed.

[Macattack1]

55. red herring much?

no, they don't need to be 'far away down the street"...just protest without destroying the first amend...is that too much to comprehend? We don't need the backlash, get it?

[LAGC]

56. What backlash, my friend?

It's really weird, because I haven't seen any of these protests at any other GOP candidate's rallies have you?

It almost seems like all of this started, as Hillary Clinton said yesterday, after Trump's "encouragement to violence and aggression ... if you play with matches, you can start a fire you can't control -- that's not political leadership, that's political arson."

But hey. Maybe Hillary Clinton is wrong about this?

I mean, clearly these protesters are "little thugs" -- you heard Sarah Palin say so herself.

Clearly Trump is not to blame for this violence at his rallies, and the media is just being mean making it look like he's responsible and trying to damage his reputation and hurt his chances come the General Election, even though we all know he's got the GOP Primary in the bag.

It almost sounds like a conspiracy to me. I mean, I can't figure out what's going on here, can you??

Why aren't these protests happening at Cruz and Rubio rallies? That's what I want to know.

It must be because Trump is white. I can't think of any other possible reason, can you?

[MadDAsHell]

61. It wasn't a protest. The organizer himself said the whole purpose was to "shut it down."

That's not protesting, that's "thought policing."

[LAGC]

63. You're right. This is outrageous!

Fascists have absolute free speech rights, but those opposing must dutifully stand silent.

Whoever said "silence is consent" was obviously full of it!

Violent hate speech and incitement to riot must be protected from any criticism at all times.

Anything less would be a "gross affront to democracy" ... or something.

[MadDAsHell]

65. 2nd red herring you've thrown into this thread. Interesting, and noted. nt

[LAGC]

66. Thank you for sharing your concern-- I mean opinion.

Along with that other low-post count member who came out of the woodwork, not posting since 2012 just to opine on this important matter.

I hate seeing Trump disrespected like this, just as much as you do. This is clearly something we should speak up strongly and forcefully about.

Because Trump is clearly a man who deserves our complete and utter respect.

But don't you worry, my friend -- I have a feeling the GOP Establishment will take him out, long before any of Bernie Bros. can.

So you can rest easy. There won't be too many more rallies to disrupt before long.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

59. Psst. the protesters are exercising their right to free speech.

Welcome to understanding the first amendment 101.

You have 'free speech' from THE GOVERNMENT. You have zero, none, nada 'free speech rights' against your fellow citizens ecercising THEIR free speech as well.

And 'we' are not using 'violent tactics'. There is zero evidence out there to suggest that any protester has engaged in any form of violence until AFTER having been attacked by Trump supporters first.

[MadDAsHell]

62. Using your free speech to shut down other's free speech is as bad as Money=Speech. nt

[Matrosov]

68. This isn't about a simple disagreement

The message of the GOP and of Trump in particular is about racism, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, and attacking the sick and the poor.

This isn't about having a difference in opinion, it's about the GOP and Trump preaching hate.

[Le Taz Hot]

57. I am embarrassed by people saying

that these people do not have the right to protest. Like we're supposed to play nice with these fascists. Good goddess. I seriously cannot stomach gutless wonders. If you're too squeamish then go the fuck home, turn off the TV and have yourself a nice cup of tea.

[LAGC]

75. Keep carrying water for your hero Trump.

He's not going to be holding rallies much longer, that's for damn sure.

The GOP Establishment is done playing with this fool. They're taking this fucker OUT!!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7685246

[LAGC]

78. Why would you think that Bernie's rallies would be shut down for?

I thought you were a Bernie supporter?

I don't see Bernie going around inciting violence and quoting Mussolini and saying how great those quotes are.

What justification would anyone have to shut his rallies down for? Do you think he's a demagogue like Trump??

Why do you see an equivalence here? Hmm? Enquiring minds want to know...

[LAGC]

82. Free speech works both ways, my friend.

When the neo-Nazis organize and hold a march, the First Amendment gives them the right to do that, and make their voices heard.

It also gives protesters the right to show up and make their presence known as well -- even if it dwarfs or drowns out the other side.

No one forced Trump to cancel his rally. He could have still shown up and engaged the protesters, and even shouted them down. Made fools out of them, whatever, until they were all escorted out.

I'm sure if it ever happened at a Bernie rally, Bernie's people would handle it quite civilly and in a peaceful manner. Not by swinging fists and staring fights like what happened with those Trump thugs in Chicago.

But don't worry about it, it's probably not going to happen again. For Trump has increased security.

He's going to make sure all those "illegals" and "colored" people are kept out from now on.

[LAGC]

85. It happens all the time, my friend.

People disrupt all sorts of events they don't agree with. It's called democracy. It's an ugly business, to be sure.

Sure, there's a little commotion, maybe a little publicity, but the trespassers are eventually escorted out.

That's how it's supposed to work. It's called civil disobedience. Breaking the law and disrupting in a minor way in order to bring publicity to a cause.

I don't know about you, but I think Trump came off worse for the wear over the whole fiasco, considering how his goons reacted.

But I guess we could try to keep all events safe and sanitized in the future, maybe force everyone to take lie detector tests to make sure they're not infiltrators or something before they ever enter an event?

Of course, that doesn't sound like democracy to me. That sounds more like the Soviet model you are bandying about above. "Only approved spectators allowed."

[LAGC]

88. Why are you opposed to civil disobedience?

I thought you were a Bernie supporter? Are you not aware that he was very active in these sorts of very tactics back in the day?

When you are dealing with fascist thugs, you do what it takes to disrupt and get publicity to your cause.

Sure, it might have taken a good 20 minutes for Trump's people to clear out those 100 protesters, but it could have been done. Indeed, it was, because they eventually left.

The bottom line that you seem to keep willfully glossing over is that Trump is a pussy and a coward. He didn't show up because he likes everything to be carefully scripted. So he took his ball and went home.

But like I said, it matters not now. For he isn't going to be in the picture very much longer. Greater forces are at play, and the Republican Party is about to purge it's Frakenstein trash.

[LAGC]

90. Why are you trying to shut down this thread, bro?

Why aren't you taking your own advice and steering clear of it, since it's obviously someone else's free speech that you are trying to trample since only one side gets to speak?

Why are you engaging in civil disobedience in this thread? Why are you disrupting?

This is so Soviet of you bro, I tell you.

[LAGC]

92. Buh-bye!

See you in another 4 years.

[jpak]

80. Trump thugs turned on the protesters - Trump thuggery is the future I fear

[RKP5637]

76. He reminds me of the rise of Hitler, many of the same tactics, and many Germans thought

it was just a fad that would eventually go away.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

79. Hell no. Democracy now, democracy tomorrow, democracy always.

Silencing opposing voices through force is illiberal, undemocratic and shameful.